E
ecampion
Guest
Has anyone read anne rice’s “Christ the Lord: Out of Egypt”? If so, is it legitimate in its presentation of Our Lord and worth reading and supporting?
Thanks.
Thanks.
- Status
A
AlanFromWichita
Guest
If it is not, it can serve as a different point of view by which you can triangulate against Catholicism to better see truth. That makes it hard, if this is right, to call any book “bad” although some might be more along Catholic teachings than others.
Alan
Alan
T
ThisOne
Guest
A
aurora77
Guest
I liked it; it’s pure speculation and fiction, but it was well written and thought-provoking. I’d actually been thinking about some of the issues she dealt with–namely, what was Jesus like as a child? Did He sleep through the night as a baby or was Mary the typical sleep-deprived new mom? How did He deal with being God and man as a youngster? It’s not like I got any answers or will be taking her book as truth, but it’s nice to know someone else is wondering the same things.
T
tmn379
Guest
I haven’t read the book, but I heard an interview with Anne Rice shortly after the book was published.
Her speculations on the childhood of Jesus are drawn from the various Gnostic Gospels (Gospel of Thomas, Infancy Gospel of Thomas, Infancy Gospel of James, etc.). Anyway, I would be somewhat reluctant about taking what she writes in the book as truth.
Her speculations on the childhood of Jesus are drawn from the various Gnostic Gospels (Gospel of Thomas, Infancy Gospel of Thomas, Infancy Gospel of James, etc.). Anyway, I would be somewhat reluctant about taking what she writes in the book as truth.
C
cathgal
Guest
Fr. Groeschel said to see it as her ‘meditation’. A purely fictional work. He commended her for her conversion (or is it reversion?).
A
AlanFromWichita
Guest
I had to read this at least twice to understand it fully. He actually commended her for a conversion?
I never realized that medidations were fictional, but in this case I can see your point.
Alan
C
cathgal
Guest
Fr. Groschel didn’t censure her book or anything if you know what I mean, not like he strongly censured DaVinci Code. She is known for vampire books and to see her authored a book about Jesus is so out of character that one wonders if she had a conversion. Fr. Groschel didn’t literally commended her but it was how I understood it when he talked about her.I had to read this at least twice to understand it fully. He actually commended her for a conversion?
I never realized that medidations were fictional, but in this case I can see your point.
Alan
W
wisdom_3_5
Guest
Anyone have a link to Jimmy Akin’s review of it? I’ve googled but haven’t come up with anything. Maybe he hasn’t done it yet.
T
tmn379
Guest
From what I gathered during a Larry King interview with Anne Rice, she was raised Catholic, but in her late teens abandoned her faith. She married an atheist… Anyway, in the last few years, she said she felt the Lord calling her back to the Church. She resisted for some time, because of her lingering disagreements with the Church (She didn’t specify what those were). However, she reached a point where she couldn’t resist the call any more and she returned to the Church despite her reservations. Also, she said she made a commitment to only write books that honor the Lord…
Anyway, that’s what I recall. It’s not a review of the book, but interesting none the less…
Cheers,
A
AlanFromWichita
Guest
It certainly is interesting. Even if it’s a ploy it makes a good story and still gives testimony to the power of the church. The book itself seems less important than the certainty of the calling.
Alan
K
Katie1723
Guest
Well, I just added to my Border’s Wish List. I’ll get it someday. I like reading a variety of books. I figure I am strong enough in my faith not to let anything shake it.
~ Kathy ~
B
B_a_r_b
Guest
This is quite startling! I have deliberately not read this book because she’s authored pornography (under a pen name) and I find her other books to be toxic and disturbing. However, anyone, no matter how low they have gone can respond to God’s call. Maybe I should reconsider.
I find that fiction can deepen my faith by leading me to new ways of looking at things but I am quite leery of reading anything by Anne Rice. For those of you who have read the book, would you recommend it?
S
sanctareparata
Guest
I was excited about the book till I got on her website. She writes about Jesus not knowing He was God till His baptism, how He accidentally “kills” a boy with his power then resurrects him, how He doesn’t understand why He can turn clay pigeons into real ones, etc. Nothing I’d like to read. Furthermore, I was excited about her re-version to the Catholic Faith till I read that she is a strong proponent of gay rights and longs for the Church’s acceptance of the homosexual lifestyle. Ugh…I got no time for that. 
A
AlanFromWichita
Guest
It seems Catholics should pray for her, whatever her state may be, since she seems willing to make a step. That is, unless everything she writes – including the negative stuff – is just for PR, in which case who cares?
Alan
Alan
A
aurora77
Guest
B a r b:
I would not recomend it to those who tend to take everything they read or hear as the Truth (not that I’m suggesting you would do that, just a warning in general). But, to those who can separate fact and fiction, I would suggest reading it. It’s an interesting read.
D
Dorothy
Guest
Unfortunately, she based her book on non-canonical writings.
Hopefully, Ann Rice will mature as she learns more about her faith.
Hopefully, Ann Rice will mature as she learns more about her faith.
A
AlanFromWichita
Guest
I am not concerned if a person writes a book but doesn’t use “official” sources.
If a person takes authorship over his/her own ideas, that is “authority” such as the “authority” with which Jesus taught and was amazing to others. Of course, Jesus could also refer back to the appropriate text when needed, but overall, a person is NOT an “authority” if they simply rehash what other sources have said.
Therefore, I suggest that books which are restricted to only say what other books are written have no discernable authority whatsoever, except that they are possible a bona fide book about other books which does not try to extend them.
It is in fact the most vicious attacks against Catholicism that has really showed me how to stand up for my own faith, and separate out the honest attacks from those which are truly in the dark.
There are many ways to learn about something; one is to keeping cramming more of the same old, same old, and the other is to observe everyday life and the ideas of the here and now thoughts of human beings, to assimilate them with respect to our own belief systems. If we stay inside our comfort zones we will protected in a way from any “troublesome” revelations that we aren’t prepared to handle.
Therefore, if the book interests a person, the person should not be required to use its “inauthenticity” as a reason not to read it. If that were the case, we should burn all book that don’t have imprimatur and nihil obstat, including those books on the way which are not kept secret until such time as they can earn their “stripes.”
Alan
If a person takes authorship over his/her own ideas, that is “authority” such as the “authority” with which Jesus taught and was amazing to others. Of course, Jesus could also refer back to the appropriate text when needed, but overall, a person is NOT an “authority” if they simply rehash what other sources have said.
Therefore, I suggest that books which are restricted to only say what other books are written have no discernable authority whatsoever, except that they are possible a bona fide book about other books which does not try to extend them.
It is in fact the most vicious attacks against Catholicism that has really showed me how to stand up for my own faith, and separate out the honest attacks from those which are truly in the dark.
There are many ways to learn about something; one is to keeping cramming more of the same old, same old, and the other is to observe everyday life and the ideas of the here and now thoughts of human beings, to assimilate them with respect to our own belief systems. If we stay inside our comfort zones we will protected in a way from any “troublesome” revelations that we aren’t prepared to handle.
Therefore, if the book interests a person, the person should not be required to use its “inauthenticity” as a reason not to read it. If that were the case, we should burn all book that don’t have imprimatur and nihil obstat, including those books on the way which are not kept secret until such time as they can earn their “stripes.”
Alan
K
Katie1723
Guest
I wholeheartedly agree. I read “just because I can” I enjoy a variety and have been known to read those which may be a “Hoax”. The surest way to get someone to DO something is say DON’T.And that goes for reading too.
~ Kathy ~
M
MarkR
Guest
The problem is that so many Catholics are so badly catechized that books such as this are confusing. I agree that telling someone not to do something is the best way to get the opposite result (story of my life), but I think that it’s a too often neglected duty of the Church to keep it’s members well educated.
The Church is THE great assimilator, but it assimilates only that which is compatable with the faith. The sources Rice uses are un-assimilatable for extremely important theological reasons and have been rejected from the time of their appearance (well AFTER the books of the Gospel btw). They’re being marketed as “new” or “secretly surpressed”, etc. sources when in fact they’re the “same old, same old” (boring as heck too).
Definately read, but know what you’re reading. I think that every parish priest should respond to and explain the truth behind all of these things as they come out. Not “Forbid”, or even “Warn against”-- Explain. Great chance for a great educational opportunity and an even deeper appreciation for the canonical Gospel…has anyone ever noticed how silly the Gnostic gospels are when compared to the NT btw?? They’re like a bad video game. The contrast between the two could actually be very helpful.
The Church is THE great assimilator, but it assimilates only that which is compatable with the faith. The sources Rice uses are un-assimilatable for extremely important theological reasons and have been rejected from the time of their appearance (well AFTER the books of the Gospel btw). They’re being marketed as “new” or “secretly surpressed”, etc. sources when in fact they’re the “same old, same old” (boring as heck too).
Definately read, but know what you’re reading. I think that every parish priest should respond to and explain the truth behind all of these things as they come out. Not “Forbid”, or even “Warn against”-- Explain. Great chance for a great educational opportunity and an even deeper appreciation for the canonical Gospel…has anyone ever noticed how silly the Gnostic gospels are when compared to the NT btw?? They’re like a bad video game. The contrast between the two could actually be very helpful.
- Status